parshiot

Friday, October 10, 2008

And that which those who prohibit rely upon the words of Rabbi Moshe {=Rambam} who wrote that "the Israelite should be separated from them in his clothing and the rest of his actions, etc.," there is no proof from there at all, for it is obvious that Rabbi Moshe did not obligate to make oneself distinct from the gentile at any rate, from the fact that he wrote after that, and this is his language:

"He should not dress in a garment which is distinct {hameyuchad} for them."

And why should he say hameyuchad for them? Let him say "He should not dress in a garment which is similar to their garments." Rather, it is clear that he only forbids in a garment which was already designated specifically to them, and the Israelites separated from it because of modesty {tzniut}, and like the explanation of Rashi in perek Ben Sorer Umoreh, or because of another reason. And it is appropriate there that it be forbidden, since it is distinct {nityached} to them because of its gentile nature, and the Israelites separate from it because of their Jewish nature, then, when the Israelites wear it, they appear as if admitting to them and being drawn after them. And this reason is only applicable by a garment which is distinct to their general population {of gentiles} because of its gentile nature, and as I have explained. But this kapa, which is not something distinct to their entire populace, but rather to their scholars because of their wisdon, and there is no gentile permitted to wear it if he is not a scholar; and also that is is not pacticed {noheget} by all the scholars of their faith, as Rav Messer Leon testified; and also I have heard that in France, no one wears it, not even the scholars -- it is obvious, indeed obvious, that this is not a garment distinct to them, since it is only distinct to scholars, and as I have written.

And you {two} have written well, that if an Israelite were to need to differentiate his clothing from the gentiles in every case, if so, there is no man righteous in the land, and this is a generation which is entirely liable, for there is no person in this generation who does not wear a garment similar to the clothing of their elders or to the clothing of their children -- and how will a person open his mouth to forbid that which all Israel practices {shenahagu} openly? At the very least, they should fear, and say, "if Israel are not prophets, they are the sons of prophets." And a kal vachomer son of a kal vachomer since they have what to rely upon from the words of our Sages, za"l, and an Israelite is not obligated to differentiate from the gentile at all, except that it should not be a garment which is distinct to them, as I have explained.

And yet, from this in perek seder Taaniyot (Taanit daf 22), there is not to prove that it is not necessary to make even the slightest change. And even though R' Benaah only took exception to the sandals, which implies that the other garments were similar to those of the gentiles, we are able to say that in that era, they {=the Jews} were only accustomed to differentiate their sandals, or even the straps of their sandals, acccording to Rabbenu Tam, and that for them it was sufficient for them since there was some minor differentiation. For according to all the commentaries, it it obvious that it did not entire the mind of the Rambam to say that he needs to differentiate all of his clothing -- for once it is recognizable that he is differentiating between Israel and the nations, it is obvious that he does not need more, and this is why he {=R' Benaah} was only insistent upon the sandals.

{J: This is thus no proof one way, but it is not a proof the other way. The point was that one could not bring a solid proof from this source that one need not distinguish at all.}

However, there is somewhat to bring a proof from this in masechet Me'ila (daf 17) in perek Kodshei Mizbeach: One time they decreed shmad {religiously oppressive decrees} upon Israel, etc., until ... Reuven ben Itzraboli cut his hair in front and went and sat amongst them, etc. {pretending to be a gentile, in order to persuade the gentiles to rescind the decrees}. And this implies that all he needed to do was cut the front hair, in order to appear as a gentile to them {the gentile legislators}. And if it were so that an Israelite needs to be different in his clothing from the gentiles in any event, it should have related {note: a different meaning of lesaper here} that he donned the garments that a gentile wears in new peace {?}, just as it related that he cut the front hair.

Recent Posts

YESHIVA WORLD NEWS

Followers

about

parshablog is published by (rabbi) josh waxman (joshwaxman [at] yahoo [dot] com), a grad student in Revel, a grad student in a Phd program in computer science at CUNY. i recently received semicha from RIETS. this blog is devoted to parsha as well as whatever it is i am currently learning.